to be fair, he fixed the code. It was never specified to to keep use the same module

Hi lexxkrt.

I've noticed that you comment quite often under more or less notable solutions which don't do what is exactly specified in a Kata descritpion.

In life not all things are in perfect order (e.g. code and documentation) and to submit a solution only tests need to pass, not the description. I appreciate that you notice these inconsistencies and it will be more benefitial to submit an Issue for the Kata for someone to make it straight or improve tests yourself, so that things in description are also tested. Comments under specific solutions may not reach an author of the Kata who can improve them. Unless thats not your goal. ;)

Have a great day and make best use of your time for the benefit of the community while you're active in here. :)

the task was not to rewrite the function but to fix it

I think these people were all speedrunning codewars

Perhaps it is too late to ask that question : the author wrote this kata in 2015.

Why is so many kata designed around so bad handling of floating point values?

At first, I was happy that I solved it(kata of 4kyu) pretty fast. Then I looked at the comments and found out how easy it was. Now, I am not happy anymore.

on to the next one from g964 👍.

My bad, sorry. It seems like I didn't pay much attention to the description and the underlying theory. All good. Thanks for replying.

Ignore it.

Resolved

Why did you submit this as an issue?

what are we supposed to return? Is it boolean True or False or string "true" or "false"?